1. The bit in Phantom Thread where Day-Lewis' character looks out over a balcony at a party, with an enormous crowd of people moving about and balloons falling from the air.

  2. It was hard to tell. I think your selection of films solely on their displaying a technological advance is not a solid one. You have a number of not-great films in your list, especially at the beginning.

  3. I am a film editor, therefore I work in a rather "technical" department of a film production - and I honestly think that considering the "technique" as the most important aspect for the evolution of cinema is a rather narrow and short sighted approach.

  4. I should've stated this in my original post, but while technique was my primary criterion, I never intended for it to be completely divorced from it's story or it's impact. Technique without narrative is worthless. It's why I picked the movies I did: their technical advancements were deeply tied to how they told their story, from Caligari's set design evoking the logic of a nightmare, to M's sound design being used to build tension and suspense. Also, an unintended but welcome side effect of the movies I picked, is that we see a cycle of breakthroughs that first come from big studios, then from independent filmmakers, and the cycle repeats to the modern day. So while not intentional, it still covers ground in other areas, albeit not as it's main focus.

  5. As much as I hate it- I really think you need to include Jeanne Dielman on the list. In fact, there’s a lot of wildly important steps forward in craft that I feel are missing. Such as

  6. I considered Jeanne Dielmann. It was going to be either that or A Man Escaped, as representatives of that so called transcendental style of film. But I thought, is that territory already covered by Late Spring? I'm not sure either way.

  7. i’d probably include Cabiria (1914), The Birth of a Nation (1915), or Intolerance (1916)

  8. I have Way Down East as the obligatory D. W. Griffith movie. Cabiria is a good choice, will add it soon.

  9. Tetsuro Araki (director of Attack on Titan) and composer Hiroyuki Sawano

  10. Wolf children made me bawl my fucking eyes out.

  11. The absolute hottest take of my life: I prefer Hosoda over Miyazaki. I don't say this to be contrarian or hispter, but I connected much harder to Hosoda's 5 movies compared to the 5 I've seen from Miyazaki. Both are expert animators capable of giving you the fuzzy wuzzies, but Hosoda's filmic storytelling is stronger than Miyazaki's in my eyes, and their deeply personal touch make them more relatable and hit harder emotionally, for me. Not that Miyazaki doesn't have this, especially in the Wind Rises, but Hosoda really does it for me.

  12. Less than 100 lists left. Final stretch. Computer is on the fritz right now. But it will come out...

  13. For value, no clue. I only remember the value of my Evangelion 1.0 and Godzilla vs King Ghidorah (1991) blu-rays because I got those for a pittance before their price skyrocketed. To keep track of the number, I have two lists on letterboxd.


  15. Firstly, understand that truly great art is emotional first. Even filmmakers that were heavy on deeper meanings, like Tarkovsky, Bergman, and Iñárritu, all subscribed to this mentality. A movie has to stimulate the emotions first before it stimulates the mind. So if you don't like any of these artsy movies, it's not necessarily because you didn't "get" the deeper meaning. Maybe you were in the wrong mood, or maybe it's just not something that connects with you.

  16. The movie that introduced me to Park Chan Wook. One of my all time faves.

  17. FailSafe is in the collection, but so goddamn underrated. It's Strangelove done seriously, and in my opinion, even better. I know that's sacrilege, but I don't care. Fail Safe turned my stomach into knots through Lumet's ingenious visual storytelling and by the end it broke it apart. One of the best movies ever made.

  18. It in some ways literally is. Stanley Kubrick and the author of the novel Red Alert on which Strangelove was based sued the author of the source novel for Fail Safe on the basis that the books were nearly identical in plot.

  19. They actually sued Lumet and the film for it's similarities. What ended up happening is that Columbia, which was making Strangelove, bought Fail Safe, which was an independent production. Kubrick insisted that his movie release first, and the result was that Fail Safe was mostly forgotten, despite good reviews. In the commentary for Fail Safe, Lumet talked about the situation and remarked that Strangelove was a wonderful movie, but thought that it's reception would've actually been improved had Fail Safe released first. Audiences could see the serious version, and then follow it up with the hilarious version, as it were.

  20. Spot on… watched it last week and I’m going through the same phase. The banality of adulthood has made me forget what it’s like to be genuinely scared like this.

  21. Sorry about that lol. Hope you weren't so freaked out. Trying now to hit the character limit. Damn true film character limit.

  22. It’s honestly a film about nothing, and as much as the discourse outside of the film has been more interesting than the film itself at times, as a micro budget film shot digital of just a corner of a ceiling that somehow is making many times its cost, I do think it’s something of an interesting phenomenon where there’s both such a divided reception yet a diehard cult appreciation being formed. I know my local art house has been selling out packed showings, I do wonder whether those are first time watches or rewatches. But when it comes to the film itself, as the other user mentioned, it’s very much an extension of slow cinema, reminds me of Goodbye, Dragon Inn in some regards and really does bring into question what exactly the medium of film is capable of accomplishing.

  23. Genuinely though, this movie is not about "nothing." Yes it's slow and weird and almost all of the main action happens outside of the frame, but it's not about nothing. And I don't even mean in the metaphorical sense. It's trying to be the absolute purest distillation of one of our most primal fears: being alone in the dark. Or rather, not alone... And especially as a kid. I know a lot of people weren't scared by this, but if ever you had a fear of the dark as a kid, like I did, like so may others, then Skinamarink is nothing short of haunting.

  24. Favorite movie of 2020. Very applicable to that year, being about mourning the past but not being chained by it, moving onward and finding "the kingdom of God" in the still silence... Some of the best sound editing in history.

  25. Kurosawa's most thematically dark samurai films are Throne of Blood and Ran, both adaptations of Shakespeare's work (Macbeth and King Lear, respectively). Even darker are the samurai works of Kurosawa's contemporary, Masaki Kobayashi. His Samurai Rebellion and Hara Kiri are even darker.

  26. It works in the reverse for me. Like, I'd probably still like the Fabelmans as a sweet little coming of age film about film, but because it's done by my favorite director, and I know going in that it's his life story, I'm already pre-destined to at least enjoy it, and because it's so good, I end up loving it. Perhaps if it was the exact same but simply didn't have the Spielberg name attached, I'd feel differently.

  27. Okay, so Polar Express made some money. I just didn't remember it being talked about. Anyway, I'm not a Spielberg hater. I too get peeved when these youngins' dismiss Spielberg because he doesn't have any billion dollar hits. They weren't alive when he dominated the 80s box office and have no idea about inflation. Has Spielberg lost his touch now? Now, I regret mentioning Spielberg. Should've said Ridley Scott. :(

  28. I'm talking about the fact that Polar Express was not only NOT from this decade, but it's not a Spielberg movie. Like, at all. He didn't direct it, he didn't produce it, none of his companies were a part of it lmao.

  29. Oh. I could've sworn that was a Spielberg movie. :) My mistake. So Spielberg has been a complete bum for the past decade.

  30. Damn bro, you got the whole squad laughing lmfao. Here, enjoy this L and ratio

  31. To go even further, let's look at his output in the last 10 years, from 2012, to today,

  32. The average person, and even the average moviegoer. Certainly not to the galactic extent of Spielberg's most famous films.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Author: admin